TfL advertising guidance failures

Emma Best: Will you apologise for TfL advertising guidance failures?

Sadiq Khan: TfL has one of the most valuable advertising estates in the world and it provides an important source of income that is reinvested in the transport network every year. Last financial year TfL ran over 11,000 advertising campaigns on its network and received only 175 complaints directly from customers. That is a rate of 1.6%. TfL ensures that all advertisements displayed on its network abide by Advertising Standards Authority guidelines as well as the UK Code of Non‑broadcast Advertising and Direct Promotional Marketing.
TfL operates a clear Advertising Policy against which all adverts are considered. Through its Advertising Policy TfL also requires advertisers to adhere to additional restrictions over and above those enforced by the Advertising Standards Authority. All advertising copy that is submitted for display on the advertising estate is reviewed against the Advertising Policy by TfL’s media partners. If they are unsure whether a particular advertisement breaches TfL policy or if it is from a specific category of advertisement that TfL requests to see, they are further copied to TfL for review.
The Advertising Policy is overseen by a Steering Group which provides a strategic, external, and independent point of view in making sure the policies remain relevant, stay up to date and are adapted when necessary. I am proud to have introduced several measures to ensure that advertising across the London transport network properly serves Londoners, including restrictions on adverts that may promote an unhealthy body image and restrictions on adverts for some unhealthy foods.
However, TfL only controls advertisement on its own estate. There are almost 1,000 bus shelters across the capital with advertising sites that TfL does not control. These shelters are usually operated by a media partner on behalf of a borough. There are other advertising spaces across London that are operated by a range of people or bodies, including media owners, councils, private property owners and other business owners. This includes a range of sites with everything from roadside advertising to telephone boxes. Advertising on all these sites is beyond TfL’s or my control.
TfL recently published its 2021/22 Advertising Report, which highlights the investment in its advertising estate and some of the fantastic campaigns that have been featured, all of which raised much‑needed revenue for our city’s transport network.

Emma Best: Thank you, Mr Mayor. You may remember in May 2022, earlier this year, we sat here and talked about some of the ads that had, I believe, contravened the junk food ad ban, and you asked me to send you those ads that appeared on the London Underground network and that you would deal with them. I left that meeting and I sent you some nice coloured photos of all those adverts. Can you let me know what action was taken once you received those?

Sadiq Khan: I wrote to you on 21June[2022] setting out the response from TfL. I can send the letter again later on today, Chair, if that helps.

Emma Best: What action was taken in relation to those ads?

Sadiq Khan: Shall I read the letter?

Emma Best: What was the action?

Sadiq Khan: “As you know, TfL amended its advertising policy at my direction to restrict the advertising of foods and non‑alcoholic drinks that are high in fat, sugar and salts across its estate. The base of restrictions in our assessments used the Public Health England nutrient profiling model (NPM). The policy applies to all TfL assets, including bus shelters and buses.
Some confusion can arise in relation to bus shelters that are borough‑owned. This is the case in some of the examples you have recently highlighted. Any borough‑owned assets which you have highlighted fall out of the control of TfL’s advertising policy. The GLA has commissioned a toolkit for boroughs to implement similar restrictions and my Deputy Mayor for Transport has recently asked TfL to do more with boroughs to influence their approach. Similar issues can occur at interchange stations such as London Bridge, where screen and advertising space ownership varies between TfL and Network Rail.
The examples you recently noticed at the bus stop at Thirlmere Gardens are not compliant with TfL’s advertising policy as the products are high in fat, sugar and salt under the NPM. However, the shelter attached to bus stop BP5920 is borough‑owned and therefore falls outside the scope of TfL’s policy. The adverts you noticed on TfL sites or at stations and on trains are all products that are compliant with the policy based on their nutrient assessment.”
Then I talk about the research from the London School of Hygiene and‑‑

Emma Best: Thanks. That confirms that things like a Big Mac Bacon on the London Underground network are still allowed to be there. That kind of shows somewhere where the policy is falling down within London Underground’s TfL estate.
The next question I wanted to ask you is: you made the statement that there would be 11 countries, I think, that would be banned from advertising due to their attitude to human rights, for example, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. What provision of the TfL advertising guidelines are you using to ban those adverts?

Sadiq Khan: In relation to countries that are banned from the estate? You mean countries that are banned from advertising?

Emma Best: Yes. In the TfL advertising guidelines, what provision are you using to ban those countries from advertising?

Sadiq Khan: TfL has an Advertising Policy which has additional restrictions. I do not have the clause that I use. I am happy to write to the Member about the clause used. I am also not aware of the list of countries. I can drop a note to the Member.

Emma Best: OK. I have been through the clauses in some detail. There is no clause that relates specifically to any countries being banned.
Now, you will remember it was in 2019 you made the announcement that you were going to take those ads off the network, and it appears that has happened. However, recently there was an ad across the bus network for Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) [World Cup] Qatar, which I am sure has been raised with you, and TfL’s explanation for why that was allowed was because it was from FIFA and not from Qatar.
There is no actual, direct reference to countries. The only provisions that you could use are (a), (h), or (q), under section2. They would be the same if it was a country as if it were FIFA presenting Qatar. What we have allowed now on our network is sportwashing through Qatar, and I do not think that is what your intention was.
If you look at those clauses, they could be tightened up. There is a specific clause, for example, on gentlemen’s clubs and lap dances. That really important statement you made around countries that could not be allowed to advertise on the bus network does not exist within the Advertising Policy. That FIFA advert could have been stopped in the exact same way that adverts for any of those other countries violating human rights are stopped.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, the Member makes a really powerful point in a really powerful way. Can I take this away? What I do not want is loopholes that are there, that can be used by people. It is very powerful, what you say. I promise to take it away and come back to you sooner rather than later.

Emma Best: Thank you.

Government Led Excessive Public Transport Fares Rise

Elly Baker: Despite Londoners struggling with the rising cost of living, the Government’s funding settlement makes it clear it expects Transport for London to raise fares, or mandates cuts if the Mayor wants to keep fares lower. What impact will the Government’s assumed fares rise have on Londoners, considering inflation is running at such high levels?

Sadiq Khan: On 30August [2022] we agreed a funding deal with the Government for TfL that came after more than a month of tough negotiations and many previous months of uncertainty. I have been determined to stand up for London and to fight for our transport network, which so many Londoners, businesses and visitors rely on. Although we managed to win several important concessions from the Government, this deal is far from ideal. It still leaves TfL with a significant funding gap, which is why City Hall is providing a new finance facility of up to £500million to help TfL to balance its budget over the next two years and to avoid the managed decline scenario that would have meant such devastating cuts to vital transport services.
This intervention from City Hall is vital to keep London moving, but I must be honest with Londoners about the difficulties we continue to face. The financial detail of the Government deal assumes that TfL will raise fares in future years and, because the deal does not provide the level of funding needed, TfL would likely have to increase fares in the future. This is bad news at a time when Londoners are already struggling with the cost of living crisis. Ultimately, we had no choice but to accept this deal in order to avoid TfL going bankrupt, which would have put thousands of transport worker jobs at risk and the London national economy under threat. Affordable fares are critical in supporting the capital’s economic recovery and encouraging people back onto public transport and back into central London.
I have taken bold action to keep fares low since I became Mayor by introducing the unlimited Hopper bus fare and freezing all TfL fares for five years, saving the average London household over £200. I have already been clear that I will resist double‑digit fares rises should the Government attempt to link fares increases to the current levels of inflation. As any fares increase will hit low‑income Londoners the hardest, I will be working with TfL to make sure fares do not increase by a penny more than is necessary to keep our transport network running.

Len Duvall AM (on behalf of Elly Baker AM): Thank you, MrMayor. Are you aware if the Government has shared any Equality Impact Assessment on what the impact of fare rises would be on the poorest Londoners and the working poor?

Sadiq Khan: No, they have not. What is worse is that they have not shared that with us and also the Government was insisting that we remove free travel from those under 18 and insisting that we remove free travel from those above the age of 60. Due to the impact on the poorest Londoners and Black, Asian and minority ethnic Londoners, I resisted that because I know the consequences. No, they are in fact doing the opposite, not publishing their own impact assessment but also wanting us to do policies that disadvantage hugely minority communities.

Len Duvall AM (on behalf of Elly Baker AM): We hear a lot from the Conservatives about wealth creation and about those who create wealth in our society. Do you think the role of TfL is a wealth creator in terms of supporting business and keeping London going in terms of its economy? Do you think that is fully appreciated by this Conservative Government?

Sadiq Khan: Do not take my word for it. Speak to London’s businesses. The Government talks about the £6billion of support they gave TfL and I am very grateful for the £6billion of support they gave TfL to keep our capital city’s transport running. Every year we give £40billion net to the Government versus the £6billion they gave to us over the last two years, which I am grateful for.
When you speak to businesses across London and business representative groups across London, they say their ability to contribute ‑ and they are happy to do so; we are the capital city ‑ is contingent upon TfL firing on all cylinders. When it came to the deal with the Government, the business groups were fantastic, from the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) and the FSB to Business London and the Chamber of Commerce, in lobbying the Government and explaining why it is a false economy to make further cuts to TfL.
The Government has to understand the importance of TfL to our capital city. The Elizabeth line contributes, separately to what I have talked about nationally, £40billion to the national economy. For every £1 we spend on TfL capital, 55 pence goes around the country. This lack of coherence is just frustrating.

Len Duvall AM (on behalf of Elly Baker AM): That coherence in terms of how‑‑ look, there are hard times and there are hard times internationally. We seem to be making it worse for ourselves here, not just mentioning Brexit earlier on but the economic policies that they are pursuing at the moment. How can Spain or Germany subsidise their public transport in times of woe when we just continually offer up more of the same? In fact, it is not more of the same. We make it worse.

Sadiq Khan: It is worse than that. Some of the buses that being run around the country in other parts of the country, the company that owns them are foreign governments. Public transport users in this country are subsidising reduced fares across Europe, which is why I fully support AndyBurnham’s [Mayor of Greater Manchester] campaign and other mayors across the country like TracyBrabin [Mayor of West Yorkshire] to undo some of the damage of the privatisation in the 1980s that led to the deregulation of buses. Think of some of our national rail. The train operating companies (TOCs) have massive profits leaving our country. Imagine the difference if they were nationalised and those profits came into the DfT to use for improved public transport. It is not working in the current system. That is why there needs to be change.

Len Duvall AM (on behalf of Elly Baker AM): Once we come out of this recession ‑ because that is what we are heading into and we are actually in it ‑ do you think there should be a new deal for transport that puts it on the path of where, if we believe in a so‑called growth strategy, it plays a part in a growth strategy but requires proper investment and sensible policies, coordinated across all the transport operators? Do you think that should be where we should be ambitious for a new deal? This is not about people resisting it, but there is just nothing on offer from this current Government.

Sadiq Khan: The Government should not wait for the recession to be confirmed. They should be investing now. One way to stimulate growth is ‑ guess what ‑ investing in public transport. Where do you think these buses are going to be made? Ballymena in Northern Ireland. Where do you think the new Piccadilly line trains are being made? Goole in Yorkshire. Where do you think these new electric bikes could be made? The West Midlands. Taxis? The East Midlands or the other way around. Signage? The Isle of Wight. The Government wants growth. You can get good growth by investing in public transport. Sakina [Sheikh AM] and Zack [Polanski AM] talked about climate change. You stimulate growth by creating jobs in insulation and in retrofitting.
By the way, with tax cuts to millionaires, the savings go into their savings accounts. Tax cuts to ordinary Londoners or increasing benefits in line with inflation is money spent in the economy. It is being spent and we can use it in relation to proceeds to the Government.
Listen. This kamikaze budget was a disaster. They have a chance now to do another U‑turn in the next couple of weeks and it is really important that they take the opportunity to do so.

Len Duvall AM (on behalf of Elly Baker AM): Thank you.

Drug Commission plan

Caroline Russell: When will your Drugs Commission start work?

Sadiq Khan: As set out in my recent manifesto, I have established a London Drugs Commission to examine the effectiveness of our current drug laws with a particular focus on cannabis. I am doing this because drugs are driving violence in our city, damaging Londoners’ health, and dividing our communities. It is time for a fresh, evidence‑based look at how best we can reduce the harm that drugs like cannabis cause. The Commission will consider if there are ways to improve the current legal framework on the use of cannabis, as well as a criminal justice and public health response to drug use. What the Commission will not do is look at the classification of ClassA drugs, which I am very clear must remain illegal.
Work on the Drugs Commission is underway. LordCharlieFalconer KC, the former Lord Chancellor, was appointed in May this year[2022] to lead the Commission and is now finalising the recruitment of two Deputy Chairs and an Expert Reference Group, which will be comprised of independent experts in public health, criminal justice and drug policy. The Institute for Global City Policing, based at University College London, has been appointed as a research partner and is now gathering and reviewing existing evidence to help shape the Commission’s focus and formulate lines of enquiry to pursue with witnesses. Once the
Deputy Commissioners and Expert Reference Group are appointed, a web page will be created setting out details of timescales and how the London Drugs Commission will approach gathering evidence. This will also explain how members of the public can input into the process, sharing their views and experience, which will be an important part of the Commission’s work.
When the Commission’s work has finished, it will make a series of recommendations for City Hall, the Government, police, criminal justice and public health partners, and I expect these recommendations to provide an evidence base on the complex issues surrounding cannabis use. The Government’s Drugs Strategy acknowledges the need for robust evidence to inform a national debate on how best to tackle addiction, and provide effective treatment and recovery systems across the criminal justice and public health sectors. The Commission will provide evidence from London, and I hope its findings will help inform the debate on this important issue.

Caroline Russell: Thank you, MrMayor. My question was, “When will your Drugs Commission start work?” What you have done just now is you have outlined all the things that were in the press release back in May[2022], but it has not really taken us forward any further. What I am wondering is: how long do we have to wait for this Commission to actually get started? It is really urgent. People ‑ and disproportionately people who are Black ‑ are being criminalised through the current policing of cannabis.
Yesterday at the Police and Crime Committee, I was really glad that the new MPS Commissioner agreed with me about the benefits of deprioritising arresting and criminalising people for possession of cannabis. He said it is a no‑brainer, that diversion generates high victim satisfaction and lower recidivism, and I quote, he said, “If you’ve got both of those things, why wouldn’t you do it?” MrMayor, will you work with the MPS Commissioner to take this ‘divert’ approach forward Londonwide?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, the work has begun. The research has begun. I mentioned the university involved. It has already begun gathering evidence and reviewing existing evidence from UK and several comparator jurisdictions around the world and there will be a web page published soon. The drugs diversion project is not new. It already exists, as you know, in Thames Valley, Durham, West Midlands and‑‑

Caroline Russell: Absolutely, MrMayor, and you have a new Commissioner who has an appetite for adopting that approach in this city so that Londoners can start to benefit from a more harm‑reduction approach to the policing of cannabis.

Sadiq Khan: I think we are in danger, Chair, of conflating the [London] Drugs Commission with a potential pilot programme that the Member is referring to, and they are two separate issues. The pilot programme is some of the stuff we have talked about in relation to West Midlands, Durham and Thames Valley. To give SirMark[Rowley QPM, Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis] some credit and breathing space ‑ I mean, he only began three weeks ago ‑ he has been a bit preoccupied with other issues and you will appreciate that drug diversion is not at the fore of his mind, nor indeed mine.

Caroline Russell: MrMayor, my second question was asking you to respond to what the MPS Commissioner said to me yesterday. He said yesterday, “This isn’t about being sentimental or soft, this is about evidence”, and the evidence is on the side of these diversion schemes. The Commissioner said himself yesterday also that the benefits for non‑white offenders were even higher than for white offenders. Will you discuss this with the new MPS Commissioner? With your Drugs Commission, we are still waiting for something on a website, and you told us about the University College [London] stuff back in May[2022]. It really feels like it is stuck, like it is not moving forward.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I spent a lot of yesterday at a TfL Board Meeting whilst the Commissioner was in the Assembly, and it is put to me today to respond to the points the Commissioner made yesterday that I was not privy to. Look‑‑

Caroline Russell: MrMayor, OK, let us move on. US President JoeBiden has just pardoned all prior federal offences for cannabis possession whereas UK Home Secretary [The Rt Hon] SuellaBraverman [KC MP] has announced she wants to reclassify cannabis as a ClassA drug. Are you with JoeBiden or SuellaBraverman on the policing of cannabis?

Sadiq Khan: I think to be fair, which is unlike me, to‑‑

Onkar Sahota: MrMayor, they are out of time.

Caroline Russell: Oh, MrMayor, we have to havean answer to that one.

Onkar Sahota: They are out of time. You do not need to answer the question.

Caroline Russell: Biden or Braverman?

Onkar Sahota: You are out of time. I did not want to hear the answer, so you are out of time.

Caroline Russell: Chair, that was unfair.

Responding to climate breakdown

Zack Polanski: What immediate plans do you have to build London's resilience and preparedness against fires, floods and other extreme climate events during the climate emergency?

Sadiq Khan: Thank you for this really important question. By the way, congratulations on becoming Deputy Leader of The Green Party.
This summer, London experienced the hottest temperatures ever recorded and the driest July since 1885. We have long been preparing for the effects of climate change and over the summer we promoted our network of Cool Spaces and, together with the boroughs, saw cooling centres open for rough sleepers. I also announced a new funding package in response to the heatwave of £3.1million for tree‑planting to increase shade and cooling.
Following last year’s floods, I established a roundtable to convene the agencies with statutory responsibility for flood management to improve communication, preparedness and response. A pan‑London group has subsequently been established to develop London’s first citywide strategy on flash flooding, and in July[2022] we sent leaflets to 45,000 basement properties to warn them about the risk they faced from flooding and advice on preparations.
The London Resilience Partnership is well prepared for responding to extreme weather, regularly reviewing procedures and updating the London Risk Register. Revisions after last summer’s flooding enabled swifter responses this year. The LFB’s new Community Risk Management Plan (CRMP) sets out how they will improve their ability to respond to new and emerging climate risks such as wildfires. My environment and planning policies are also helping London to adapt, and my Green New Deal programme to deliver green infrastructure, rewilding and natural flood management.
My team are in regular contact with ThamesWater and the Water Services Regulation Authority (Ofwat), and we have been working with them to unlock hundreds of millions of pounds of investment in London’s water infrastructure. My officers have been meeting weekly with ThamesWater to assess their management of the drought this summer. We also work closely with water companies in the southeast to ensure they are cooperating to safeguard London’s supplies.
However, as the Climate Change Committee stresses, much more needs to be done to help the UK adapt to climate change. Our buildings are not ready for rising temperatures and there is still no legal requirement to adapt homes, schools, hospitals or care homes. We need to install shading, better ventilation and reflective or green roofs, alongside insulation. We need to increase public awareness of climate risk and build community resilience. The Government must also overhaul building regulations, strengthen planning policies and fund widespread building retrofits, starting with those most vulnerable, so that we can all adapt to the climate emergency.

Zack Polanski: Thank you very much for this answer, and if I can extend my thanks also to Assembly Member Sheikh for working together on the Pakistan motion.
I want to turn our attention to the comments of MattWrack from the Fire Brigades Union (FBU, General Secretary). He said in The Guardian, noting the challenge of climate change to the Fire Brigade, that “there’s a real horrible complacency”, and he was talking about the Government there. He thinks exactly the same things could happen again and some sort of disaster could happen. What would be your response to MattWrack’s comments?

Sadiq Khan: A disaster in relation to wildfires?

Zack Polanski: To both. Let us go with the wildfires.

Sadiq Khan: I think Matt is right. One of the things that was astonishing about the heatwaves this summer: you will remember us using our communications channels to remind people that 40°C means, basically, if you have a cool home, stay at home; if you have to be out, wear cool, loose clothing. Our firefighters were going towards fires wearing the heaviest, most oppressive kit you can imagine, breathing apparatus, trying to put these fires out. As a result of their brilliance no lives were lost, but you are right in relation to us sleepwalking into regular wildfires and regular flash flooding.
There are two things that are required, which you know very well. One is dealing with the consequences of climate change, the adaptation, but also avoiding it getting even worse. This is now, with temperatures south of 1.5°C. Imagine if it got to north of 1.5°C.

Zack Polanski: I think you are exactly right on that. I have been in touch with the FBU. They are worried about the national challenge, and they say they need new resources now, new investment. You will know very well that they had their worst day since World WarII, they were running out call operators on that day and we were almost running out of fire engines. Now, that was a small intense heatwave that I am not underplaying ‑ it was still incredibly dangerous, and they did do amazing work ‑ but we are always worried about this chain of events. If a few events happened, what would happen then?
My question is this. Given the scale of the climate emergency ‑ and I believe you get that, you talk very well about it ‑ isn’t it time that we also increased the scale of the Fire Brigade? We are talking new stations, new equipment and new staff.

Sadiq Khan: If only. I am the first Mayor since 2008 who has not been cutting firefighters, not been cutting fire stations, not been closing down and removing fire engines. We give from City Hall much more to the LFB than the Home Office advises we should give, and you will notice in the most recent Plan that was consulted on we talked about the importance of adaptation and resilience. The stark reality is we had to increase council tax precepts to invest in the fire service.
You mentioned the wildfires. Imagine if, God forbid, there had been a fire like Grenfell on the same day as one of those wildfires. We are dealing with transformation from both His Majesty’s Inspectorate [of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services] (HMICFRS) reports and Grenfell, and adaptation, using the limited resources we have. The Government needs to give us much more support. We simply cannot do it alone. Any support you can give in lobbying the Government is clearly greatly appreciated, but we already give LFB way above what the Home Office advises.

Zack Polanski: I will absolutely continue to lobby the Government, but isn’t there a case here that you can reprioritise some of your budget? We had the Marshall Plan in America in response to the war. Shouldn’t we not be looking at a war footing, essentially, in making sure the LFB are ready for the climate emergency and other future climate events?

Sadiq Khan: The Marshall Plan that the United States (US) Government had was only recently paid off. I am afraid I do not have the ability to borrow that the Government has, and with interest rates now being what they are because of the Government’s incompetence, I am not sure it is wise to borrow at the rates caused by the Government’s mini‑Budget. However, we will look into whatever way we can to support our fire service. Our fire service knows that since 2016 they have had a Mayor on their side, and I will carry on being on their side.

Zack Polanski: I am out of time. I am sure we will continue this conversation. Thank you, Chair.

ULEZ Expansion Consultation

Nick Rogers: Following the closure of TfL’s ULEZ Consultation, what are the next steps that you intend to take?

Sadiq Khan: Following the closure on 29July[2022] of the consultation on my proposals to improve air quality and Londoners’ health, tackle climate change and reduce congestion, TfL has been preparing a comprehensive report to enable me to make a decision on next steps. I am told that the report will include analysis of the responses submitted during the consultation, the Integrated Impact Assessment, and other material relevant to my decision.
TfL has appointed an independent consultant to produce a report with analysis of the consultation responses. This work is underway and will inform two reports that TfL will share with me. The first report will cover the amendments proposed to the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) and the second will cover the other proposals TfL consulted on, including the expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) to all of Greater London. Along with other relevant information, these reports will include a full breakdown of all the consultation responses. I expect to receive the reports for my consideration and to publish my subsequent decisions before the end of this year, as well as laying the MTS revision before the Assembly. It would not be appropriate for me to sidestep due process by providing a running commentary on the analysis that is underway.
My proposal to expand the ULEZ Londonwide is designed to help address the triple challenges of improving air quality and public health, tackling the climate emergency, and reducing traffic congestion across Greater London. Information already in the public domain includes the YouGov polling commissioned by the Greater London Authority (GLA) that shows that a majority of Londoners believe that the planned expansion should go ahead, against 27% who do not.
Toxic air caused by road traffic is still leading to thousands of premature deaths a year. The greatest number of deaths attributable to air pollution are in London’s outer boroughs, which the ULEZ does not currently cover. The ULEZ has already been hugely successful in central and inner London, helping reduce roadside pollution levels by nearly a half. Five million people are expected to breathe cleaner air if the ULEZ is expanded to outer London. The expansion would reduce the number of Londoners living in areas exceeding interim World Health Organization targets for nitrogen dioxide by 13%.
I will consider all available information before making my decision on the way forward.

Nick Rogers: Thank you, Mr Mayor. An investigation by The Telegraph brought forward serious concerns about how the consultation was being managed. Your timeline of showing us the analysis of the consultation by the end of the year is not good enough. These concerns need to be allayed. Will you open the consultation process to public scrutiny so people can see how these responses are being processed?

Sadiq Khan: As I have said in my answer, Chair, TfL will be preparing a report in due course and they will be publishing, as they always do, all the information. I am sure people will have a chance to see it and be reassured or not reassured once TfL publish all the information. This is not the first consultation TfL have undertaken, it is not the first consultation people have been unhappy about and it is not the first consultation where those who are against a certain policy have had objections, and we have to let the process run its course. As ever, TfL will be completely transparent when it comes to consultation responses and their analysis before I make my decision.

Nick Rogers: It sounds to me like you are ignoring the fact that there are serious concerns being raised right now about this consultation and the way it is being handled. We have had multiple whistleblowers come forward to express their concerns, and whilst you say it is not appropriate for you to provide a running commentary I think it is appropriate ‑ in fact, I think it is incumbent upon you ‑ to allay those concerns and open the consultation process to scrutiny. When you were sworn in you said that you were going to be the most transparent Mayor that London has ever had. This is your chance to put concerns to rest and to make good on that promise. Will you do so?

Sadiq Khan: I think I have already explained, Chair, we will be publishing the responses and the consultation. We are going to be completely transparent about that, including the analysis. TfL have even asked an independent third party consultant to do the work just to reassure those who are concerned, but also to make sure there is the right expertise in relation to the analysis that is undertaken. If TfL were to publish in real time before a recommendation has been made, they would be criticised and challenged for haste. They are damned if they do, and they are damned if they do not.

Nick Rogers: TfL and yourself would be applauded, I think, for transparency if they were to demonstrate how these consultation responses were being managed. You yourself have said that the consultation has been “hijacked”. What evidence do you have for that?

Sadiq Khan: At this week’s TfL Board meeting one of the TfL officers explained there were concerns in relation to campaign groups and those from outside London having disproportionate numbers in there. The two issues and themes that have been raised are being looked into by TfL. That is all the officer gave details of at the TfL Board meeting.
It is really important I do not prejudge my decision. I have not predetermined what I am going to do. The danger of me giving opinions in relation to the issues already raised at TfL Board is that the impression could be given that I have predetermined it. I have not. It is really important for TfL to speak on any concerns they have. TfL is concerned because of the stuff on social media from some of the national groups, the fossil fuel interest groups, and some of the things they have said, including heat maps from around the country where they have responded. TfL have talked to that at the Board meeting yesterday.

Nick Rogers: Claiming that a consultation has been hijacked sounds to me a little bit like predetermination. This is your chance to prove that claim. You could open the consultation to public scrutiny and if it has been hijacked that would be shown. Will you open the consultation to public scrutiny?

Sadiq Khan: TfL will in due course.

Nick Rogers: Thank you, Mr Mayor. I see we are going nowhere with this one and I am out of time. Thank you.

Pakistan Floods Support from City Hall

Sakina Sheikh: How is City Hall supporting flood disaster relief efforts for Pakistan?

Sadiq Khan: What we are seeing in Pakistan is a terrible humanitarian crisis and the brutal reality of climate change. Devastating floods have hit the country and as a result, nearly 1,700 people, including 600 children, have lost their lives. Homes have been destroyed, health facilities damaged, and crops and livestock ruined. Thirty‑threemillion people are impacted. That is equivalent to almost half the population of the United Kingdom (UK).
This crisis will be a cause of great concern to Londoners, including of course those of Pakistani origin here in our capital city. I have been raising awareness and urging Londoners to support in any way they can, including directing Londoners to the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) appeal for Pakistan, which has already raised £25million. I have also written to the Pakistan High Commissioner, His Excellency Moazzam Ahmad Khan, to extend my condolences, and indeed the Prime Minister and the High Commissioner when I saw them recently in London.
It is also important that we understand the causes and impacts of this crisis so we can help prevent future emergencies like the one unfolding in Pakistan today. There should be no doubt Pakistan is at the forefront of what the United Nations (UN) Secretary‑General, AntónioGuterres, calls “climate carnage”. Millions of Pakistanis are not only dealing with terrible floods but earlier this year, before the rain, they faced deadly heatwaves in the spring, followed by huge wildfires and crippling drought. This is particularly unfair as experts estimate that Pakistan has accounted for less than 1% of global carbon emissions but is one of the most climate‑vulnerable places in the world, with considerably fewer resources to mitigate the impacts of climate change than the world’s worst polluters.
Here in London, we are pursuing policies that reduce our carbon emissions and we are encouraging other cities to do the same. Our cities consume more than two‑thirds of the world’s energy and account for more than 70% of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Our climate policies play a pivotal role in curbing the impact of climate change around the world. As chair of the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, I have committed two‑thirds of C40’s budget to the Global South so that cities in Pakistan and elsewhere have the resources to limit their emissions and increase resilience to future shocks.

Sakina Sheikh: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. It is great to be discussing this with you. It is such an important issue. I think with the ever fast‑moving news cycle this could easily be forgotten but not only would I call it a humanitarian crisis, to echo your words, but I would also call it a political crisis. This cut quite close to the bone ‑ my family’s heritage is from Pakistan ‑ but also there are many people who for decades have been calling for climate justice, and that is why myself and Assembly Member Polanski, when we brought the motion to the Assembly, made sure that we made clear that climate change is the result of political action and inaction.
To that end, I wanted to ask: what are you doing from City Hall to ensure that when we talk about solidarity and support with Pakistan, the communities here in the UK and the communities there in Pakistan, we are connecting the dots? What climate action here in London are you encouraging to ensure that we do not have further disasters in Pakistan and other Global South countries?

Sadiq Khan: Thanks for your comment and your question. It is great to see cross‑party support for this really important issue.
I think people have to understand that what we are seeing across the globe are the consequences of decades of a certain type of action and a certain type of inaction. This summer you will remember how we felt when for a couple of days, temperatures went to 40°C. Pakistan experiences that on a regular basis. You will see that on the day it happened in London, the London Fire Brigade (LFB) had the busiest day since the Second World War. Just imagine that on a regular basis in a country like Pakistan and their ability to respond to the crisis.
Also, it reminds us of the importance of providing moral leadership ‑ bearing in mind our responsibility as the Global North, who have caused many of these challenges ‑ and also supporting the Global South. The 27th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP27) is really important in relation to ensuring there is adequate compensation for loss and damage, but also real social justice so that there can be a just transition.

Sakina Sheikh: Thank you, Mr Mayor. Just briefly, to finish off, what are you doing to support the diaspora communities here in London whose families may be impacted by overseas flooding in Pakistan?

Sadiq Khan: This is really important. There are many links between London and Pakistan, for the reasons you have suggested. Both you and I have familial links to Pakistan. We are doing lots from City Hall, helping fundraising events across London, using our social media accounts to raise awareness of the DEC charities, and encouraging people to donate to those charities who are already on the ground. I know Islamic Relief are on the ground. They are part of DEC.
Your point about the media caravan, the news cycle moving on, is really important. Those 33million people affected are still affected. That is why it is so important that as we approach our Christmas and the season of goodwill, we have at the fore of our minds those who are struggling across the globe, including those suffering the consequences of the floods in Pakistan.

Sakina Sheikh: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor.

London Fire Brigade and His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire Rescue Services report

Anne Clarke: Following the publication of HisMajesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire Rescue Services report on the London Fire Brigade, how have you been working with the Brigade to continue to improve the service it provides to Londoners?

Sadiq Khan: I welcome the latest report from HMICFRS into the LFB. The support provided by the Brigade to Londoners during the global pandemic and the extreme events over the summer have demonstrated the capability of London’s firefighters. In even the most challenging circumstances, they have shown they will step up and protect our city. We also know there are areas where the Brigade requires improvement. Important progress has been made by the Brigade over the past two years, including the delivery of 26 of the 29 recommendations from Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 1, for which the LFB received praise from the Inspectorate. The Inspectorate was also satisfied with the Brigade’s progress against two causes for concern from its last inspection and closed them both. However, further improvement is still needed in some other areas.
Complex, large‑scale organisational change takes time, but it is encouraging to see that action has already been taken against some issues raised in the latest report. The Inspectorate raised clear concerns about culture at the Brigade and the London Fire Commissioner had already commissioned an independent review into the culture of the Brigade, which is due to report in November[2022]. I will continue to work with the Commissioner to ensure that the Brigade makes the progress needed between now and the next inspection.

Anne Clarke: Thank you, MrMayor, and I echo your thanks to the LFB for their services throughout the climate‑related fires and also throughout the mourning period following Her Majesty’s death.
I am worried that during our last Fire, Resilience and Emergency Planning (FREP) [Committee] meeting we had JohnLambe from the FBU join us, and something he said has really stuck with me. That is that these heroes that are protecting our city are increasingly going to food banks. I am concerned that, as you have highlighted, this is an organisation that is in the middle of organisational changes, in the midst of culture changes, addressing a lot of the issues in the LFB. I am wondering: to what extent are limited resources factoring in to the Brigade’s ability to make the reforms that it needs?

Sadiq Khan: Without a doubt resources are a key factor. In answer to the previous question about a Marshall Plan for climate change, I talked about some of the challenges the LFB is under. We have firefighters with whom we have a contract, in my view, which is: you risk your lives, go in harm’s way; we give you the right kit, the right support and the right remuneration for you doing so, and look after you when you retire. I am not sure we are keeping up with our end of the bargain in relation to pay, in relation to adaptations and new challenges the Fire Service is facing.
A firefighter now has to deal with a terrorist incident as well as putting out fires. A firefighter now has to deal with flash flooding as well as preventing fires. A firefighter now has to deal with heatwaves as well as giving advice to families. They are doing more and more and more and more. We know the brilliant work they did during the pandemic, by the way. It is a question of whether that professionalisation is leading to better terms and conditions and so forth. There are also deep cultural issues, which the [London Fire]Commissioner is seized of and addressing as well. Big transformational change with limited resources can be a recipe for big problems.

Anne Clarke: It is a real challenge. My own personal experience with the Brigade and certainly the Commissioner has been one where they recognise the need to change, and they are absolutely working on it. However, they do have these challenges, and I think funding is a big one. I do know you give over and above what is recommended by the Government and I thank you for that. I am just wondering: in terms of the CRMP, which we know is due to be published, how do you think that will help change the future of the Brigade?

Sadiq Khan: Well, it has been the biggest and widest consultation ever undertaken for one of these Plans. They used to be called Fire Safety Plans before; in term1, there was a Fire Safety Plan. More consultation than ever before. It is also seeking to address some of the issues raised by HMICFRS, by [the] Grenfell [Tower fire], by climate change and other issues as well, including how we use the resources in London. The response has been phenomenal, and I know your Committee has made a number of suggestions which have been taken on board in relation to the CRMP.
It goes live in January2023, and it is a plan for five/six years, so it is forward‑looking, trying to foresee the challenges we face. I have to say this: who would have guessed six years ago that there would be a lot of buildings in London that are unsafe, where the staple advice does not apply? In the context of no knowns, it is a really good Plan. Londoners have bought into it. However, there may be unknowns around the corner, which we have to be ready for.

Anne Clarke: Thank you so much, MrMayor, and thank you, Chair.

Continuing support for the Community Led Housing Hub

Siân Berry: What progress are you making to ensure the Community Led Housing Hub continues to exist beyond the end of the £38 million Community Housing Fund?

Sadiq Khan: Community‑led housing is an important part of the housing mix and, since becoming Mayor, I have taken decisive action to boost London’s community‑led housing sector. This includes securing £38million from the Government for London’s Community Housing Fund and earmarking specific sites for community‑led housing through my Small Sites, Small Builders programme.
Central to this is London’s Community‑Led Housing Hub, which I launched in 2018 and has been supporting community groups to get projects off the ground ever since. The invaluable work of the Hub has helped me and my team to meet ahead of time my target to identify a pipeline of 1,000 community‑led hubs. It has also laid the groundwork to enable me to allocate £26.6million of community housing funding to support 94 community groups in 11 London boroughs. Almost 70 homes have started and a further 250 are expected to do so shortly, including innovative schemes such as [emailprotected], the UK’s first lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer plus (LGBTQ+) homes for older people. I remain committed to the Hub and continuing into the future.
I am delighted to announce, thanks to the hard work of Deputy Mayor [for Housing and Residential Development] TomCopley, that I will continue to fund and support the Community‑Led Housing Hub to 31March2025, two years beyond the originally agreed end date. This will allow time for the Hub, with TomCopley and the team’s support, to develop robust plans for long‑term self‑financing. There has already been good learning about the kinds of projects that the Hub could assist without significant external funding and our team is currently supporting them with two projects to test out future models.
I am also delighted to have launched last month the opportunity for community groups to submit proposals for the 50 homes on the St Ann’s Hospital site, which we have earmarked specifically for community‑led housing.
More widely, though, I am extremely disappointed in the Government’s decision not to continue the Community Housing Fund past April 2024, despite us lobbying directly for this, including through my submission to last year’s Comprehensive Spending Review. Longer‑term investment is critical, and London’s great progress will be thwarted unless the Government steps up and provides this. I have recently written to the new Secretary of State [for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities] requesting a meeting to, hopefully, discuss this and many other priorities for London.

Siân Berry: Thank you very much, MrMayor. That is lots of new information and really useful. You will recall I tabled a question on this topic from the last MQT that we, sadly, had to cancel, but I was very encouraged by your written response that I received. Today I am not here to accuse you of doing nothing on this at all. I am here to just check up on that and to suggest enhancements.
I note that you in your previous answer said that you remain committed to funding the Hub and today you have made an announcement. That is genuine progress since just last month. Applause for that.
In terms of proper capital funding, I do share your disappointment that the Government, having made the Community Housing Fund, has now not responded at all to repeated requests to re‑fund it. I am wondering what we can do ourselves. Looking at what we have left in it in terms of unallocated funding, it seems from last year’s budget there is just £7million next year and £2.5million the year after and then no more in 2025. Is there anything we can do from within our own budget to top that up some more, just to give some more certainty to people making future plans?

Sadiq Khan: Do you mean after 2025?

Siân Berry: I mean to stop it being zero in 2025, which is what it currently is, and £2.5million is not much the year after. We need some certainty in the pipeline.

Sadiq Khan: Understood. Firstly, can I place on record my thanks? Tom [Copley] and I are grateful to your assiduous work with us on this issue.
We are worried, as you are, indeed. What we said to the Government is that they set an objective of between 5% and 10% of the 2021‑2026 Affordable Housing Programme (AHP) money to be used for this community‑led housing, but it is only capital, as you said. You will know that it is quite resource‑intensive in relation to enabling, empowering and so forth. We are trying to be innovative where we can, but I am not going to pretend that we have the answer yet. I am more than happy for you to sit down with Tom to discuss innovative ideas.
Without that revenue support, this capital money will not be able to be used, which is heart‑breaking, bearing in mind the lobbying we have done to get where we are. We are in the ideas business. Chair, if I could suggest that we set up a meeting? If we can make it work, we want to make it work.

Siân Berry: OK. That is useful. We can use some capital money also as one‑off revenue just to get capital stuff over the line but we can discuss that in more detail.

Sadiq Khan: The issue with these community‑led projects is they can often take quite a bit of time and that is the issue.

Siân Berry: That takes me to my next question. What I would like to propose to you today is‑‑ you talked about testing out future models. You have mentioned Tonic housing, which did buy rather than build the building that it is in. What I would like to put to you today is bringing the same idea you have put in place with the Right to Buy Back Fund into this sector as well. You could look more seriously at putting additional resources into helping community groups buy their supply from homes that already exist. The Right to Buy Back Fund is great, and it has done over 1,500 homes but it is very specifically just for councils at the moment. If you were to extend that to community‑led housing projects and properly advertise that to them, you could genuinely make a difference to bringing forward more of this model of housing.

Sadiq Khan: It took literally hours and hours ‑ I am sure Tom [Copley] would say months and months ‑ of negotiating with the Government to persuade them in relation to flexibility. I am more than happy in the meeting that the [Assembly] Member has with Tom to discuss other ideas she has. We have to be pragmatic and dexterous and not be stuck in inflexibility. It has to be persuading the Government about some of those AHP rules and stuff. Chair, I am more than happy for that to be one of the issues that the Member discusses with TomCopley.

Siân Berry: Excellent. I will continue this conversation in the run‑up to the budget. The more things we can do the better, basically.

Sadiq Khan: We are grateful for this collegiate way of working, Chair.

London Living Wage 2022

Marina Ahmad: On 22nd September you announced the London Living Wage uplift which takes the London Living Wage to £11.95 per hour. How important is thisupliftin supporting Londoners during the cost of living crisis?

Sadiq Khan: The London Living Wage will play an essential role in supporting Londoners during the cost of living crisis. This year’s London Living Wage rates have been uplifted and brought forward in recognition of the sharp increase in living costs in London. Over 140,000 people working for over 3,000 real Living Wage employers in London are set for a vital cost of living pay boost with the biggest increase yet in the rate. That is an 8% increase to £11.95 an hour, a 90‑pence an hour increase worth over £4,700 each year.
I am proud that the number of Living Wage employers in London has more than quadrupled since I became Mayor. This is testament to the efforts of employers, workers, community groups, faith groups and others who are continuing to work together in the Making London a Living Wage City programme. I co‑chaired this ambitious programme with the Bishop of London, which is led by the Living Wage Foundation and Citizens UK, to increase uptake of the Living Wage in low‑pay sectors such as health and social care, the cultural and creative industries, hospitality and service provision. Living Wage accreditation is a mandatory requirement of our Good Work Standard and I continue to champion its benefits to the lives of Londoners and to businesses, encouraging employers to opt in.
However, employers voluntarily paying a Living Wage is just one measure to help Londoners meet the cost of living crisis. I will continue to explore all options for actions we can take in London, but these are national challenges that require actions at a national level. The national benefit system is the best mechanism to get support to low‑income households and the severity of the cost of living crisis means that increasing benefits in line with today’s inflation is the response that is required now to protect living standards. Failing to increase benefits in line with inflation amounts to the second real‑terms reduction to benefit payments that low‑income households will see in six months, coming on top of the £20 cut to Universal Credit. The Government must act now to protect Londoners and people across the country.

Marina Ahmad: Thank you, MrMayor. As you know, next week is London Challenge Poverty Week and all of these issues of course will hit the headlines again. The Living Wage Foundation, which you just alluded to, recently found that 42% of workers now regularly skip meals because of a lack of money and that figure is up by 10% since this January [2022]. Given that Downing Street has adopted the going‑down‑a‑blind‑alley attitude to the economy, what action have you taken to address the consequences of in‑work poverty?

Sadiq Khan: This phrase “in‑work poverty” in itself is heart‑breaking. These people are working, often two jobs, and they are in poverty. Some 40% of those who receive Universal Credit are working, often two jobs.
We are doing a number of things in relation to supporting these families with the limited resources and powers we have. One is to give free skills training to those receiving the minimum wage so that they can skill up and receive the London Living Wage through the Adult Education Budget (AEB). That is a really important programme, which is already helping many families across London. We are also giving grants to insulate people’s homes. It will reduce their bills and also address carbon emissions, which is really important in relation to Assembly MemberPolanski’s point earlier on and Assembly Member Sheikh’s point earlier on as well about climate change and what we do in relation to that. We are also supporting people receiving free advice so that they get the benefits they are entitled to. We are spending over £80million in relation to this issue. On top of that, a lot of the £400million AEB is to support those families to go from minimum‑wage jobs or for those who are out of work to get good Living Wage‑paid jobs.
By the way, the Good Work Standard is making a big difference. More and more employers are becoming Good Work Standard employers and helping hundreds of thousands of families across London.

Marina Ahmad: Thank you, MrMayor. You talked about doing two jobs. One of my constituents in Peckham this week was telling me about the four jobs that she does with about five hours’ sleep every day and children to look after. She is still reliant on food banks, which is utterly shocking. The work that you are doing at least is addressing some of this but, as you say, so much of it rests with the Government. Thank you very much.

Sadiq Khan: Thank you, Chair.

Operation London Bridge

Onkar Sahota: How has the GLA worked with partner organisations to deliver Operation London Bridge successfully and effectively?

Sadiq Khan: While the country was mourning the passing of Her Majesty The Queen, the GLA coordinated successful partnership working between London agencies and central Government to ensure that the events during the period were delivered safely and sensitively. I represented London on daily Cabinet Office Briefing Room A (COBRA) meetings, working with and updating Ministers on London’s preparedness and response over the period. The GLA was responsible for establishing and running the London Coordination Centre and the Palestra Event Liaison Facility to enable partners to work effectively together.
As part of the planning and delivery, the GLA also oversaw the work of an event management company that coordinated stewarding and infrastructure on the ground. We also recruited and supported the volunteering effort, including many GLA staff, and delivered the GLA’s own plans. I am immensely proud of the work of GLA officers and many others to deliver Operation London Bridge. The dedication, long hours and expertise officers offered during this time ensured that Londoners, visitors and international dignitaries were able to honour the life and service of Her Majesty.
I was pleased to take [The Rt Hon] NadhimZahawi [MP], the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, to the Palestra Event Liaison Facility and the London Coordination Centre, and the Secretary of State for Transport, [The Rt Hon] Anne‑Marie Trevelyan [MP], also came to thank the teams there in person. Nadhim and Anne‑Marie coming really made a big difference.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you. Yesterday we had the Commissioner of the MPS here, who recognised the hard work of the police and did say this is something we did very well in London, but there will always be some lessons to be learnt. Is there a review taking place, looking at what worked well and what did not go well?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, as you would expect, Chair, there is a review taking place of the things that worked well and things we can improve upon, because this will not be the last big event we have. Since the review began, you have heard about His Majesty’s Coronation taking place in May[2023]. In advance of that, we have the New Year’s event that may take place. I do not want to disrupt the grid in relation to giving details of that, but there are big events all the time and you have to be evolving and learning all the time. That being said, we should all be incredibly proud. The world’s eyes were on our city for a number of days, and I think we did not only Her Late Majesty proud but our city proud as well.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you. Of course, the other thing we need to realise is that there are people who have mobility problems and disabilities, and how they were able to take part in the Remembrance services and the funeral arrangements. How did you ensure, for example, that the viewing areas and the screens at Hyde Park were accessible to disabled people?

Sadiq Khan: By the way, it was fortuitous that Her Late Majesty passed away when she did, time of year‑wise. Imagine December, January or February in relation to the queues, older people and all the rest of it. We were blessed by the time of year Her Late Majesty passed away. A lot of work took place in relation to vulnerable people. The queue, removing sightlines. The traffic lights you see in and around the footprint area were removed, put back, removed, and put back on a number of occasions because of sightlines for disabled people and other people as well. It is needed in between ceremonial processions.
We also, for the first time in this country, had a grey space. A grey space is the area between a footprint and main stations. If you remember the Manchester Arena bombing, the grey area outside the arena is where the terrorist caused huge loss of life and injuries. It was the first time we were trying that, and so we were cognisant of people who cannot walk long distances, about sightlines, about wearing the right clothing, particularly older people, around viewing of Her Late Majesty when she was laid in State.
Chloe Smith [MP], the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, and her Deputy Minister were assiduous at the daily COBRA meetings in reminding all of us about issues that had been brought to their attention by disability groups and by charities. It is a really good example of central Government, regional government, different agencies ‑ the civil servants were amazing ‑ working together for everyone’s good to make sure they had a good experience in these horrible circumstances when we were grieving Her Majesty’s death.

Onkar Sahota: Thank you, MrMayor.

Violence Against Women and Girls

Keith Prince: What are you doing to ensure the safety of women and girls?

Sadiq Khan: The safety of women and girls in London is a top priority for me. I want every woman and girl to be safe and to feel safe, whatever time of day and wherever they are in the capital.
My refreshed Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) Strategy is fundamental to achieving this. If we are going to truly fix the problem of VAWG, we need to see a fundamental cultural shift that puts the onus of responsibility on men. In March this year I launched my Have a Word campaign, which urged men to challenge disrespectful and harmful attitudes towards women. Our film has been seen more than 13 million times and 85% of men who saw it said they would call out misogynistic behaviour.
TfL’s campaign on its zero‑tolerance approach to all forms of unwanted sexual behaviour and sexual harassment continues to raise awareness to help make Londoners safer by making our transport network safer and I will be working with key stakeholders and community representatives to refresh our Female Genital Mutilation Stops Here campaign, further building community awareness and support for the eradication of this awful practice.
Tackling VAWG requires proper investment and I have overseen more than £100million in investment in this area since I was first elected. Over this year and the next two financial years, I will be overseeing a further £37million in specialist services to improve support, tackle perpetrator behaviour and better educate the public. Since 2019, we have funded the pan‑London Victim and Witness Service to support domestic abuse victims and we fund Youth Independent Domestic Violence Advocates (IDVAs) to engage with victims who present with a risk of child sexual exploitation and domestic abuse, working alongside youth workers who are embedded at trauma centres. I am also investing in programmes focused on addressing and changing the behaviour of perpetrators, including launching the first‑ever GPS tagging pilot of domestic abuse offenders.
My VAWG Strategy champions a public health approach and encourages everyone in London to play their part. This includes securing over 1,000 signatories to my Women’s Night Safety Charter. I am also working with SirMarkRowley [QPM, Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis] and the MPS, holding them to account on their VAWG Action Plan as they root out misogyny from the organisation and rebuild trust and confidence with women and girls. Just last week, my Deputy Mayor [for Policing and Crime] SophieLinden joined a walk‑and‑talk in Clapham Common where women and girls met with local officers to discuss how to make their local area safer.

Keith Prince: Thank you, MrMayor. I must admit that I tabled the question before we had the good news from you about your action plan and the words we have had from SirMarkRowley and so I would like to claim the credit for having generated that. I know I have not but‑‑

Sadiq Khan: I am sure there is a direct link.

Keith Prince: We absolutely welcome what you are doing, actually. Having said that, I know you know that there is a gangs matrix for gangs, which identifies people who are likely to be involved with gang crime. Do we have the same or a similar thing for people who may or may not be involved in domestic abuse and/or VAWG?

Sadiq Khan: It is a really good question. One of the huge advantages of this Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] is he is using some of his expertise in counterterrorism to deal with that very issue you mentioned, Keith. What is potentially game‑changing is him transferring some of those skills. Basically, sometimes but not always ‑ you have to be careful ‑ you can predict behaviour in relation to what has happened in the past. I have talked about some of the stuff we are doing with the GPS tagging, the stalker centres across London and so forth. What the Commissioner is talking about is using some of that expertise to affect behaviour, targeting those men that the police suspect may in the future cause harm. Watch this space in relation to further announcements from the Commissioner, but that is quite exciting, if I can use that word, because that could really change things.

Keith Prince: Thank you. That is really helpful. Also, as I am sure you are aware, we have issues with sanction detection rates, ie the number of people who actually get prosecuted. Are you doing anything about sanction detection rates, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: That is a big issue across the country. Not just the police service has faced big issues in relation to cuts but also the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the court system. Across the country, in relation to rape and other violence against women and girls, the number of men who are found guilty is in single digits versus those who come forward with complaints. That leads to people having less confidence reporting when they are at the receiving end of violence against them and also issues around rape.
The MPS is investing more in investigative work and investigations being better. They are working much more collegiately with the CPS to improve that figure. Also, we are investing more in the IDVAs, having an independent adviser alongside the victim.
The big issue at the moment, though, is the delays caused by COVID ostensibly and courts closing down. If your trial is going to be in two years’ time and you are a victim, the question is if you are going to stay with the process. That affects attrition rates. The sanction detection rate is a very important metric. The Commissioner gets it, as does the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). We are lobbying the Government for more resources in London to try to address the backlog of trials so that, rather than taking two years, they can be in months or at worst a year rather than two years.

Keith Prince: Thank you. I am sure my colleague will take up the issue regarding knife crime. Thank you for your answer.

Sadiq Khan: Thanks.

Sir Tom Winsor's review

Susan Hall: What reflections do you have on your personal conduct following Sir Tom Winsor’s review into the circumstances of Dame Cressida Dick's departure?

Onkar Sahota: The next question is in the name of Assembly Member Hall. This question has been altered a bit, after discussions with Assembly Member Hall, to read:
“What reflections do you have on your actions and decisions following Sir Tom Winsor’s review into the circumstances of Dame Cressida Dick's departure?”

Sadiq Khan: Londoners elected me to hold the MPS Commissioner to account, and that is exactly what I have done and will continue to do. I will make no apology for demanding better for London and for putting the interests of the city I love first. If Londoners do not have trust and confidence in the police, the police cannot do their job of keeping the capital safe.
I have a legal duty as London’s Police and Crime Commissioner to scrutinise the MPS Commissioner’s performance and to challenge it when there are failings. My role under section3 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 requires me to ensure that the MPS is both efficient and effective, and to hold the Commissioner to account both for their performance and for the exercise of the functions of persons under their direction and control.
This is what I did with the former Commissioner. The discussions and meetings that took place in the run‑up to the former Commissioner’s decision to resign were entirely in keeping with my statutory role. On the former Commissioner’s watch, trust in the police fell to an all‑time low following a series of terrible incidents and scandals. Londoners were losing confidence in her ability to lead the deep‑rooted change that was needed in the MPS, as was I.
We now have a new Commissioner of the MPS, Sir MarkRowley [QPM], who has demonstrated to me that he is determined to be a reforming Commissioner, committed to implementing a robust plan to rebuild public trust and confidence in the police and driving through the urgent reforms and step change in culture and performance Londoners deserve. Sir Mark’s clear and comprehensive plan to win back public trust and confidence includes pursuing wrongdoing by officers of all ranks. I am confident that SirMarkRowley is the reforming Commissioner London needs and that he understands the scale and urgency of the task at hand.
I have also been clear that I will support him in his work while holding him to account, not least in ensuring that the MPS is both efficient and effective, as is my statutory duty. I want to assure Londoners that I will continue to hold the MPS and their leadership to account so we can see the changes the public deserve.

Susan Hall: Thank you, Mr Mayor. Good morning. You are the first Mayor to have been summonsed to the Police and Crime Committee using this power. Do you accept that the findings are serious and warrant investigation by the Committee?

Sadiq Khan: No, the so‑called summons is politically motivated, but I am more than happy to come. You could have just picked up the phone and rang me.

Susan Hall: OK, well, we can beg to differ on that one. Are you confident that all the processes and procedures were followed properly regarding the former Commissioner’s departure?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, I am.

Susan Hall: Thank you.

Right to Buy Back Scheme (1)

Sem Moema: What steps are you taking to encourage more boroughs to sign up to your Right to Buy Back Scheme?

Sadiq Khan: For too long, London’s council homes have been disappearing into the private sector, often never to be replaced. I am working hard to replenish London’s social housing stock with a relentless focus on increasing the number of council homes and I have brought council house building in London back up to levels not seen since the 1970s.
In July2021, I launched my flagship Right to Buy‑back Programme, allowing councils to bid for a City Hall grant to purchase homes in the second‑hand market and convert them into affordable housing. In August last year [2021], I expanded this offer to help councils provide housing for refugees fleeing Afghanistan. In the past 12 months, we have allocated over £154million to 15 boroughs to bring over 1,600 homes into council ownership, which includes 938 social rent homes. In March this year [2022], I launched a £1million
Right to Buy‑back Revenue Fund to help boost uptake of the programme. I have since allocated over £800,000 in revenue grants across eight boroughs, which will provide much‑needed investment in technical services and staffing to increase buy‑backs across London.
My team is continuing to secure new deals with boroughs to purchase homes through the Right to Buy‑back Fund and just last month our team signed a new deal with the new and much improved leadership at Wandsworth Council to purchase 40 buy‑backs through our Fund. Our door is open to any borough looking to secure new deals. Good councils across London have worked extremely hard and have smashed my target to build 10,000 council homes by 2022. I have now doubled my initial target and I am calling on councils to start work on 20,000 new council homes by 2024. I know it is a tall order. I look forward to further developing these important partnerships with councils to help deliver the genuinely affordable homes that are needed now more urgently than ever.

Sem Moema: Thank you, MrMayor. You may be aware that the Housing Committee recently looked at alternative ways of increasing council and social housing supply and we do also know that about 40% of the 300,000 homes that were bought under Right to Buy are in the private rented sector. I really welcome the Right to Buy‑back Scheme. Some of my boroughs have benefitted from that. Again, I applaud and want to continue the work around the homes for Afghan refugees following the takeback of Afghanistan by the Taliban not that long ago. My question is really how that links to improving the lot of those people who are in temporary accommodation (TA). What is the impact of the Right to Buy‑back Scheme on those people living in TA across London?

Sadiq Khan: The housing crisis has been decades in the making, ostensibly because demand has not met supply. The bad news is it will take some time to match those up, and that is why we are lobbying for both rent freezes now and rent control going forward, because in the short to medium term people must use the private sector.
In relation to TA, in 2020 there were 62,000 households in TA. That is now down to 56,000 households in TA so we have made progress, but we are not going to make the progress we need to make unless we get many, many more homes being built, not just Right to Buy‑back but many, many more homes. They have to be the right sorts of homes. They have to be council homes, homes that are genuinely affordable, sub‑market homes rather than homes that are bought by investors overseas and used as gold bricks.

Sem Moema: Then finally, there have been U‑turns and then U‑turns on U‑turns from the Prime Minister on the private rented sector and ending section21 [evictions]. Many of those people who are in TA or are statutorily homeless have been evicted from their assured shorthold tenancies (ASTs). I just wonder, in the coming weeks and months, what work City Hall will be doing to continue to push the Government to end section21 so that people can be secure, and we can at least have a pause as far as possible whilst City Hall and other social housing developers build the homes that we need for Londoners.

Sadiq Khan: Well, I saw your anger and your demand for the Government when it did its second U‑turn‑‑ first U‑turn‑‑ second U‑turn in relation to this particular policy, in relation to the promise it had made after lobbying from us to end no‑fault evictions. It then said it was going to do a U‑turn and reverse that, and then it has announced another U‑turn and it is going back to the original position, which is to end no‑fault evictions. That is an example of us lobbying the Government for change, initially.
It has to go ahead with that because what we need is accommodation with security of tenure for those in the private sector and affordable rents. The section21 route does not give security of tenure. People have done nothing wrong and they are being told to leave, often, by the way, because the landlord wants to increase the rent. We need both parts of the equation. We are currently lobbying for no‑fault evictions, but at the same time we need rent control powers in London to address both of those issues while we build the genuinely affordable homes we so badly need.

Sem Moema: Thank you.

Government mini budget 2022

Len Duvall: Does the Government’s mini-budget announced on 23 September 2022 do enough to support Londoners with the increased cost of living this winter?

Sadiq Khan: Thanks for this question, which I know is causing many Londoners real concern. This mini‑Budget was such an important opportunity to address key issues in our country. The cost of living crisis is hammering people in London and across the nation, and we desperately need proper investment in ordinary people to drive economic growth from the bottom up and middle out. All we got was the wrong policies from a Government that has the wrong priorities, lifting the cap on bankers’ bonuses, giving unfunded tax cuts to the most well‑off, and now talking about punishing the most vulnerable with a real‑terms cut in Universal Credit.
Under these plans, bills are still set to rise by hundreds of pounds for many households across our city. Any limit on these bills will be funded from borrowing, putting the cost back on taxpayers, while fossil fuel companies make huge profits from the rise in wholesale prices. This is not a Government on the side of ordinary Londoners. The things that Londoners really needed were an increase in Universal Credit in line with inflation, the devolution of powers to freeze private rents in our city, a lifeline energy tariff so that elderly and vulnerable Londoners can get a basic level of energy free of charge to stay safe and warm this winter, and free school meals for all primary school children.
Here is the key bit which this Government does not seem to understand: you do not get economic growth by putting more wealth in the pockets of those few who already have plenty. You have to create a stable economy that gives businesses the certainty they need to invest in growth, you need well‑funded public services and infrastructure, and you need to ensure that everyone in our society can afford to buy the things they need to get by and the things they want to live well.
This is a Government that says they love the markets, but the markets certainly do not love this Government. Not only have we seen the pound crash but, more importantly for ordinary people across our city, the cost of borrowing for businesses, for those with mortgages and for Government, shot up in response to the mini‑Budget. The fiscal event was a disaster for Londoners and for the whole country.

Len Duvall: Thank you. The Chancellor’s mini‑Budget was described as “the worst unforced economic policy error of a lifetime”. Put that aside, if you can, and of course almost daily now we hear of other issues that do not give confidence in this Government or their economic policies. There is a Medium‑Term Fiscal Plan on 31October[2022]. You have alluded to some issues that you want to see in terms of the short term but are there any others, or would you want to go into a bit more detail about what you want to see in that mini‑Budget for Londoners? From a London perspective, what is immediately needed?

Sadiq Khan: Sure. It was the biggest unforced, self‑inflicted economic error since the last one, hard Brexit, which was the worst self‑inflicted error since the one before, having a referendum, which was the worst self‑inflicted economic error since the austerity Budgets of [The Rt Hon] George Osborne [former Chancellor of the Exchequer]. This party has got a habit of self‑harm. However, they themselves, and their donors, do not pay the price. It is ordinary people, small businesses, who pay the price.
Aside from people renting in the private sector who are really struggling and need a rent freeze for the next two years at least, aside from the families who are choosing between heating and eating, parents skipping meals so their kids can eat, we now have this new word ‑ someone growing up in the 1980s did not know what it was ‑ a warm bank. It is bad enough with food banks. We now have warm banks to keep families warm this winter. Even if you park that, even those with really good salaries who have a mortgage and are lucky enough to own their property are seeing mortgage payments going up by £400 a month. They were just about managing before, they are really struggling now, and the real danger is that they cannot keep their head above the water.
What the Chancellor must do when he has his Budget ‑ I think he has to do it before, I do not think we can wait ‑ is an immediate freeze on rents in the private sector for the next two years. That will save £3,000 for those who rent privately. Benefits have to go up by inflation, not wages, really important, because if they go up by wages that is a cut. The Universal Credit £20 payment has to come back. In primary schools, there was a horrible story in Lewisham two weeks ago of a child pretending to eat a packed lunch because his parents could not afford to put a packed lunch in his box, and he did not want to be embarrassed by not being in the lunchtime and having his lunch. Free school meals for primary school children.
Reverse the worst parts of the mini‑Budget that [The Rt Hon] KwasiKwarteng [MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer] and [The Rt Hon] Liz Truss [MP, Prime Minister] announced recently. All these things are causing havoc on the markets. The pound collapsing means the cost of importing food is going up all the time. It is really important that they repair the damage they have done.

Len Duvall: OK, thank you.

PEEL report

Unmesh Desai: Last week saw the release of the HMIC’s PEEL inspection of the MPS. It highlighted a number of key work areas for the MPS that require immediate improvement. How will you and MOPAC work alongside the MPS to ensure that the necessary improvements are made?

Sadiq Khan: The PEEL report reinforces the very serious concerns I have expressed about the MPS for some time. My Police and Crime Plan confronts the cultural and performance issues that are deeply rooted in the MPS. My Plan prioritises effective response and investigation, victim and witness care, trust and confidence, public protection and the protection of young people, and these are areas where HMICFRS has also identified the need for focus.
Quality support for victims has always been one of my key priorities, which is why I appointed London’s first Victims’ Commissioner to act as an advocate and champion of victims’ voices in the capital. Following concerns flagged by my London’s Victims’ Commissioner, the MPS Witness Care Units are undergoing review to examine the quality of communication to victims, internal processes, roles and responsibilities, culture and workload.
To address the response time concerns raised in the PEEL report, I invested £5million for additional capacity to the MPS contact centre. MOPAC has undertaken significant scrutiny of stop and search through our Action Plan, which is discussed at every Oversight Board. The Community Monitoring Groups oversee the work of the MPS to ensure that stop and search is being carried out lawfully. Protecting the public is an MPS priority and this has clear links with reducing harm and exploitations within my Police and Crime Plan.

Unmesh Desai: Thank you, MrMayor. Yesterday, we had the Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] before the Police and Crime Committee and this is what he said in his opening statement. He wanted to see less crime on the streets of London, more trust in the police and higher standards from his officers, sentiments which we all welcome. Rebuilding trust and confidence is obviously vital and a huge part of this is day‑to‑day policing, which is why I was so encouraged by recent reports that the MPS will attend every burglary. I think the National Police Chiefs’ Council also said something similar.
Would you agree that this is a step in the right direction but that we also need to see action on issues like ASB and other volume crime? Only one out of the 21 crimes reviewed by the Inspectorate that had been reported by victims of ASB was actually recorded by the police, which is puzzling because the Inspectorate said that they are quite good at dealing with ASB. It begs the question: why do they not record the full extent of ASB complaints to them?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, you will know the cumulative impact of ASB on the victims and the communities and that is why it is so important for the police to get this right. SirMark[Rowley QPM, Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis] already gets that. The good news is we have additional police officers joining; the bad news is they are going to be inexperienced, and it will take some time for them to bed in. SirMark is committed to neighbourhood policing and that will help in relation to evidence‑gathering and more success about the issue of ASB. It is really important that we make progress there because that has an effect on the trust and confidence of the community and so it is really important we tackle that.

Unmesh Desai: The last question, MrMayor, is that the Inspectorate rated the MPS performance on responding to the public as being inadequate, with call handling in the MPS control centre falling well below standards. We also saw data from your office earlier this year showing that the MPS screened out over 134,000 recorded crimes in 24 hours in 2021. How important is it that the MPS quickly improves its service in this area of policing?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, there are two issues you raise. One is that in advance ‑ so before we had the HMICFRS report ‑ we invested £5million to sort this out because it is a really important issue in relation to that. One of the explanations for screening out complaints of crime is lack of resources and so they are prioritising and triaging. That has an impact on trust and confidence because if you report a crime and no action is taken today, why should you tomorrow come forward as a witness or to report another crime? It affects trust and confidence. That is why, when SirMark talks about more trust leading to less crime and higher standards, he is right and that is why trust and confidence is so important to crime. The more trust and confidence, the less crime. That is why you have to clean up ASB and take action in relation to burglaries, because that engenders more trust and confidence, which means more eyes and ears from the public and more cooperation. That is what policing by consent is about.

Unmesh Desai: Thank you, MrMayor.

Energy Prices and Public Institutions

Joanne McCartney: Are you concerned that public institutions in London such as schools and colleges, museums and hospitals etc. will be unable to cope this winter and beyond due to rising inflation, especially rising energy costs?

Sadiq Khan: It is scandalous that the public sector faces real‑terms funding cuts while energy companies are being allowed to keep massive windfall profits and corporation tax is being cut. Public service institutions have already seen over a decade of cuts and austerity. Now their bills have been rising rapidly, plunging them into even further uncertainty. Every extra pound spent on energy reduces funding for essential frontline services. The Government must now provide sufficient funding to prevent schools and other public bodies having to choose between heating their buildings and making staff cuts.
Energy efficiency is the best way for public sector organisations to minimise the impact of energy price rises. My Retrofit Accelerator ‑ Workplaces programme has helped improve over 600 public sector buildings, including schools, hospitals and council offices, saving at least £10million per year on energy bills and over 27,000 tonnes of carbon. Many of these projects have been delivered using the £117million of funding that we helped secure from the Government’s Public Sector Decarbonisation Scheme. However, the Government has not committed to any funding to the Scheme beyond 2024/25. More investment is needed. I have urged the Government to provide longer‑term funding certainty for energy efficiency and decarbonisation measures for London’s public sector, homes and businesses.
Public sector bodies can also take a leading role, which is why I brought together some of the capital’s biggest organisations through the London Recovery Board. Through the Green New Deal mission, they have pledged to accelerate public estate decarbonisation efforts and help ensure we have a well‑trained, green construction workforce.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you, MrMayor. Since I wrote that question, the Government has announced an Energy Bill Relief Scheme for businesses and organisations, but it only lasts for six months and still bills will be going up markedly in that six months. For example, I visited my local Business Improvement District at Wood Green recently and was told about the plight of the hospital sector. Lots of small restaurants, facing rises in food prices but also now energy bill rises, were really on the edge. Does that six‑month relief scheme allow organisations, whether it be public sector buildings, museums ‑ who I know are having a really hard time ‑ or businesses, the opportunity to plan? What would you like to see coming forward from the Government?

Sadiq Khan: Well, firstly, you heard a lot from this side [of the Chamber], claiming to care about small businesses, the FSB and families in relation to the cost of living crisis when it came to a policy to clean the air in our city, which disproportionately affects the poorest Londoners and businesses. You hear nothing in their questions ‑ nothing at all ‑ about some of the things that businesses and families are facing in relation to energy prices going up, which in itself speaks volumes. Businesses I have spoken to say
six months is not enough and they need certainty over the next period. If you are a restauranteur and you are into a long‑term contract with your staff and your overheads and so forth, you need more certainty than six months. If you are a business, planning for the next two/three years, six months does not really get you anywhere because you are planning now for what happens in March[2023].
What the Government has to do is provide them with the certainty, but not paid for by borrowing from the same people over the future. We know the fossil fuel companies have made profits exceeding £170billion. Why do we not use some of that money through a windfall levy to pay for businesses and families to keep their head above the water? Six months is not enough for businesses. I welcome the two years announcement from the Government, although I do not welcome it simply being on average £2,500 a bill. Nor would I welcome it being on the back of money being borrowed from the same people who are going to pay it back in a few years’ time.

Joanne McCartney: Yes, thank you. Of course, our public institutions, whether it be libraries or museums, are being thought of as warm places for people to go who cannot afford to heat their own homes. You quite rightly said earlier it is appalling that we are now in a society which not only has food banks but is looking to have warm banks, but it looks like they might be a necessity for some people. What work are you doing with local councils and others to make sure that people do have somewhere warm to go?

Sadiq Khan: You know I have been involved in local government for many, many years. I cannot envisage a time where we talked about buildings being used to keep families warm because they could not afford to turn their heating on.

Joanne McCartney: Yes.

Sadiq Khan: We have had a massive increase in food banks ‑ a massive increase ‑ over the last 12 years, more so over the last few years. By the way, the last 12 years, the continuum is which party has been in government. You cannot blame that all on Brexit because a lot of it was before 2016. You cannot blame it all in relation to the hard Brexit; a lot of it was before 2019. You cannot blame it all on the mini‑Budget; a lot of it was before the mini‑Budget. The continuum is choices. Austerity was a political choice and this whole point about this mini‑Budget, about a trickle down, is there is cake for those at the top and there are crumbs for those at the bottom, which includes people having to hope that councils keep their libraries and community centres open to stay warm.
We have been speaking to London Councils, which is doing a great piece of work in relation to councils doing stuff. [The London Borough of] Islington has already announced its first warm spaces, community centres and all the rest of it. We are speaking to London Councils about other councils. By the way, the councils have had 60% cuts in the last 12 years, 65% cuts, in tough times opening up their spaces for families to use. Rather than turning the heat off at home and having real consequences, they can come to a warm space.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you.

Junk Food Bans and Cost of Living

Andrew Boff: Has your position on junk food bans changed in light of cost of living challenges?

Sadiq Khan: I am deeply concerned about the impact of the cost of living crisis on Londoners and the level of food insecurity that exists across our city. We know that 40% of Londoners have struggled to pay their food bills in the last three months and that many are having to make changes to the way they live. With costs continuing to spiral, this is only set to get worse. It should not be the case that families are forced to choose between healthy and unhealthy food for themselves and their children because of these financial pressures. All children deserve the right to thrive and eat healthy, nutritious food.
We know that policies such as the Soft Drinks Industry Levy, known as the sugar tax, and the TfL advertising restriction make it easier for people to avoid unhealthy food and drink. The introduction of the levy has seen many companies reduce the sugar content of their drinks, making them healthier, without costing the public more. Steps like this are important in addressing high child obesity rates and supporting the long‑term health of our young Londoners.
Since the TfL advertising restriction was introduced three years ago, research has found that among other health benefits it has been estimated to have prevented almost 100,000 obesity cases, with the most disadvantaged communities expected to see the greatest benefit. Businesses have continued to advertise by promoting their healthier products, with no loss of advertising revenue.
The policy is supporting families to make healthier choices, and instead of asking struggling Londoners to turn to junk food the Government must instead act urgently to address the cost of living crisis. They must ensure that families in London and across the UK are properly supported and can access healthy and nutritious meals for them and their children. They could start by increasing benefits in line with inflation, providing free school meals for all primary‑aged schoolchildren, giving London devolved powers to freeze private sector rent, and taking action to combat the surging cost of energy without putting the cost on the taxpayer. I am doing what I can to support Londoners from City Hall and I am helping them to access the support they need to reduce their costs or maximise their incomes through the Cost of Living Hub, but only the Government has the powers to make the difference needed and it can and must do more.

Andrew Boff: Did you attend the Labour conference this year, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: Most of it, not all of it.

Andrew Boff: Perhaps you did not get a chance to listen to WesStreeting [MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care], who, when talking about junk food bans, said:
“I’m not tin‑eared enough to say that a Labour Government would do that in the middle of a cost of living crisis. I don’t think that would be the right thing to do right now.”
Why is it that WesStreeting understands this, and you do not?

Sadiq Khan: What he said was that it is not an immediate priority and I agree with him. It is not an immediate priority. The immediate priority is addressing the cost of living crisis and rectifying the mini‑Budgets. That means addressing the issue of energy bills, addressing the issue of people’s rents, addressing the issue of interest rates, addressing the issue of the pound crashing. Those are the immediate priorities and that is what Wes said.

Andrew Boff: He basically referred to junk food bans as being not a priority and not something we should be doing now at a time when families are and will be struggling to make ends meet.

Sadiq Khan: I agree with Wes. The immediate priority is the Government sorting out its economic policy in relation to compounding what was already going to be a horrible autumn and winter. That is the immediate priority.

Andrew Boff: What is it about the cost of living crisis that means that it does not need to be addressed in London now? You are saying that the junk food ban in London takes priority over measures to ensure that families can afford food.

Sadiq Khan: No. WesStreeting was talking about the buy‑one‑get‑one‑free deals with junk food that the Government has delayed. We are talking about something different, which is advertising on the public transport network. That very much should carry on and it is going to carry on. The issue that WesStreeting was talking about was whether buy‑one‑get‑one‑free offers should be the immediate priority.
The reality is and the evidence is, by the way, that these offers lead to people buying more junk food, but often they have to spend a huge amount of additional money to get the benefits of these offers. The figures are remarkable. A family would have to spend £370 extra to get a £70 saving. What this buy‑one‑get‑one‑free deal is doing is two things. Firstly, it is inadvertently encouraging families to spend much more money. It is not rocket science. That is what supermarkets want. Secondly, it is driving them towards foods high in fat, sugar and salt, rather than the good stuff. That is the issue with buy‑one‑get‑one‑free deals.
The Government agrees with me, by the way, or it did until [The Rt Hon] LizTruss [MP, Prime Minister] did a U‑turn. What Wes is talking about is whether that is the immediate priority. I agree with him. That is not the immediate priority. The immediate priority is sorting out the mess the Government has made of the economy.

Andrew Boff: Some while ago I published a report called Tipping the Scales and I sent you a copy. One of those recommendations was that some of the advertising space on the transport network should be used to encourage healthy eating. Is that something that you would take up?

Sadiq Khan: I can certainly look into it. Apologies. I cannot remember the details of the report. I can look into how we can use the space on the TfL advertising estate to send good public health messages. That clearly is good. By the way, you look great after losing weight. If it is good for you, it is good for the rest of London as well. Maybe you can give us some tips on how the rest of us can lose weight. I am more than happy for the TfL estate to have good messages on it, including addressing public health inequalities. They go towards obesity. They go towards smoking. They go towards sexually transmitted infections and diseases. They go towards vaccines, which I talked about in my opening statement.

Andrew Boff: Sorry, I am still felled by that rather random reference. Perhaps that undertaking would be useful, because more carrot and less stick is something that we can demonstrate works when addressing childhood obesity. Public information works. Working at a local level works. Junk food bans do not work.

Sadiq Khan: The problem is ‑ and it is good question you have asked ‑ that the evidence is that you are wrong. You are wrong because of two pieces of really important evidence, one from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicines and a second, separately, from the University of Sheffield, both of which showed that as a direct consequence of our policies of banning foods that are high in fats, sugar and salt, there have been remarkable benefits in London in relation to families who, hitherto, were having big issues and have seen big benefits. The London School of Hygiene and
Tropical Medicines evaluated and showed that my policy, which you are against, contributed to households buying up to 1,000 fewer calories of energy from unhealthy foods each week. The second report from the University of Sheffield showed 94,867 fewer cases of obesity, with savings to the NHS of over £200million. We have two pieces of independent reports from experts, versus AndrewBoff. I know who I believe.

Andrew Boff: Of course, those reports do not show that, they are comparisons between London and the northeast of England, but I will leave it there. Thank you, sir.

Motorcycle Delivery Drivers

Caroline Pidgeon: What are you doing to ensure a safe environment with the rise in motorcycle deliveries?

Sadiq Khan: My Transport Strategy established the aim of eradicating all deaths and serious injuries from London’s roads by 2041, and to achieve Vision Zero we have to create a safe environment for all road users. Since the baseline, motorcyclist key stats ‑ the number of people killed and seriously injured (KSIs) ‑ have reduced by 33%, but people riding motorcycles, mopeds and scooters sadly remain significantly overrepresented in incidents on our roads. While they represent only 3% of vehicle kilometres driven, they still accounted for 19% of deaths on London’s roads in 2021.
The food delivery industry has more than doubled since the beginning of 2020, bringing with it an increase in delivery riders. TfL estimates that up to 40,000 currently operate in London, most of them ride high‑risk, low‑powered motorcycles and scooters and they have only completed basic training. Motorcycles with engines under 125cc have the highest casualty numbers and these causalities have increased over the past five years; 3,459 in 2017 to 4,656 in 2021.
TfL is engaging directly with the sector to help protect those riders. In November, next month, TfL will be hosting a forum for food and grocery delivery companies, designed to help share best practice and deliver longer‑term cooperation and improvements to safety for riders. In parallel, TfL is updating its own design guidance, ensuring that all high‑risk schemes consider motorcycle safety, and this will be completed in 2023. TfL offers a range of free enhanced motorcycle training courses, including the Beyond Compulsory Basic Training (CBT) course aimed at delivery riders. This work also includes a partnership with the MPS to deliver BikeSafe training.
The CBT for motorcycles and mopeds, which is the responsibility of Government, was developed over 30 years ago and needs revision. It currently enables people as young as 17 to ride motorcycles up to a speed of 70mph with L‑plates after only one day of training. TfL will continue to lobby for improvements to this legal minimum standard, but this requires action from Government. TfL also continues to make further progress on my wider Vision Zero commitments, including lowering speeds on its roads and improving the most dangerous junctions. The number of injuries to motorcycle users has fallen by an average of 18% across our improved junctions.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you very much for your answer. Collisions involving powered two‑wheelers have increased by 16.5% in the last year and tragically 14 motorcyclists were killed on our roads in 2021, with more than 900 severely injured. Out of all the things you were talking about, what is your personal priority to focus on to try to reduce this danger on our roads?

Sadiq Khan: One of the key things is that we have to change CBT. It does not work, it is 30 years old, and it is not fit for purpose. By the way, there is no test. You go along for a day, you ride ‑ whatever you do ‑ around the cones and stuff for the day, you wear the high viz and you can then go out and ride a motorbike up to 70mph with pizzas on the back, with an app where you get paid more the more deliveries you do in an hour. It is a combination of reforming CBT, but also the forum next month is very important. We need responsible businesses to recognise that it is a danger to their staff and the payment method, and so a combination of those two will really make a big difference.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you. Have you personally met with companies such as Deliveroo, Uber Eats and so on to discuss improving the safety of the industry? It is great to hear that TfL is having this forum and some of that came out of a discussion I went to, a roundtable, a while ago. Have you had any discussions with them about trying to improve this area of safety?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, I have discussed with a couple of the chief executive officers (CEOs) the issue of their staff safety and the terms and conditions, generally speaking, of their staff. I think the good companies and big ones get it and you will hear some good news, which is very imminent. One of them has already announced some good news. It is not fair if I name them; unpaid‑for publicity is probably not wise. There are some really good companies and what we are going to do after November[2022] is name and praise them properly, and give the chance to others to come up to spec. There are some good examples of businesses who get it and also understand the issues around carbon footprint and around terms and conditions in relation to road danger for not just their riders but also to others as well.

Caroline Pidgeon: Yes, we are seeing this huge rise in motorcycle delivery drivers, and they are having a huge impact on our high streets across London with motorcycles parked dangerously on pavements, engine idling, speeding bikes, litter and far worse, quite frankly, using estates and places as toilets. You could lead the way on this area, MrMayor, and it sounds like the discussions are starting. I really hope you might consider this option. Will you consider introducing a mayoral standard or charter mark for such delivery companies? Companies could apply for this. They could demonstrate all the things we have discussed: comprehensive motorcycle training for drivers, decent working conditions, including access to facilities and breaks, which again will ensure safety on our streets, and the use of cleaner vehicles. Is this an idea that you will explore?

Sadiq Khan: We already are.

Caroline Pidgeon: Fantastic.

Sadiq Khan: Watch this space.

Caroline Pidgeon: Watch this space? Well, there you go. It sounds like‑‑

Sadiq Khan: You are in danger of ruining my grid.

Caroline Pidgeon: I am very pleased to ruin your grid. I did have a conversation with officers a few months ago and started suggesting this, so it sounds like they may have jumped at the idea.

Sadiq Khan: There are some things where we do not have the powers to do things, right? However, we have convening power and the bully pulpit of City Hall.

Caroline Pidgeon: Exactly.

Sadiq Khan: Also, the name and praise model is really important. If you as a punter knew that the company you are buying your pizza off, your fast food from or whatever was somebody who is signed up to a ‑ I will use the word “charter” because it is your word ‑ charter, that may affect your spending habits. Also, it raises pressure on the others to raise their standards as well, which is really important. Most consumers in London are quite savvy and want to do the right thing. It is important, and also we should look after our people, workers.

Caroline Pidgeon: Yes, exactly. Lovely. Thank you for your positive response and I look forward to seeing the announcements shortly then. Thank you.

Improving London’s Crumbling Hospital Infrastructure

Krupesh Hirani: Following reports of significant delays to the Government’s New Hospitals Programme, will you join me in writing to the new Prime Minister calling for the necessary funding to be released to ensure that the six projects earmarked for London can be completed as soon as possible?

Sadiq Khan: London’s NHS has some of the world’s most advanced facilities and best staff but also some of the worst hospital buildings in Britain, with some just trying to keep the rain out. Building “40” new hospitals by 2030 was a central commitment in the Government’s 2019 Election manifesto, regularly repeated by [former Prime Minister, The Rt Hon] BorisJohnson [MP] ‑ remember him ‑ including as a parting shot in his farewell speech outside Number10.
Epsom and StHelier, Whipps Cross and Hillingdon [hospitals] were identified for delivery by 2025. Reports have suggested this work will not be completed until 2027 at the earliest and it could be even later, with delays likely to cost millions of pounds. Trusts have highlighted their frustration with the delays and uncertainty, and I have seen the very real impact of the failures to move schemes forward.
In July2021, Whipps Cross [Hospital] was forced to cancel 582 planned surgeries and over 100 face‑to‑face outpatient appointments and to divert ambulances after flash floods caused major damage to parts of the already rundown building, the electric system and power supply. During the July[2022] heatwave, Epsom and St Helier [Hospitals] featured nightly in news bulletins as hard‑pressed staff fought valiantly to keep patients cool and safe in antiquated buildings. The London Estates Delivery Unit has supported local progress on individual projects, but the Government urgently needs to increase the pace of the national programme and provide the necessary funding for our hospitals.

Krupesh Hirani: Thank you, MrMayor. Just this morning, figures have revealed that waiting lists for hospital treatment have hit a record high of 7million in England. That is just fresh as we were walking into City Hall this morning. Two years on from the Government pledge to fund and implement these vital new hospitals or hospital renewals, we are now hearing reports that most of these, as mentioned in your opening remarks, will not be ready until 2027 at the earliest. Do you share my concerns that these protracted delays that we are seeing will lead to even longer waiting lists and cancellations, even longer than the disastrous numbers that we have seen reported this morning?

Sadiq Khan: It is a big concern. By the way, you cannot blame this just on COVID. These backlogs, waiting lists, were in place before COVID. It is a direct consequence of 12 years of starving the NHS of the resources it needs, and it is really important to understand it is not just the cataract patients who are waiting longer. Those who need a hip replacement, but those whose early treatment of cancer could save life and lead to longer lives. We have not even talked about social care. It is a big concern and winter has not even arrived yet. That is one of the reasons why in my opening remarks I mentioned the importance of the vaccines, because we need to do what we can to alleviate the pressure on the NHS. It is incredibly worrying.

Krupesh Hirani: For the new Epsom and StHelier Hospital project in Sutton, each year of delay adds between £20million to £30million to costs of the scheme and for Whipps Cross [Hospital] that figure is between £50million and £100million, probably even more now given what we are seeing with inflation. The Government’s inertia is not only putting patient care and safety at risk but also costing the taxpayer hundreds of millions of pounds. It is not surprising that the National Audit Office (NAO) is looking into this. Will you be sending evidence in to its investigation?

Sadiq Khan: Once the NAO has published its scope of reference for the review, I will look into that and then I will respond accordingly. What we do is we normally consult with local councils, Members of Parliament (MPs) and practitioners but, yes, subject to what the review scope is I will be responding.

Krupesh Hirani: Finally, will you join me in writing to the new Prime Minister to make sure that we can get those projects moving in London?

Sadiq Khan: Absolutely. I have already written to the new Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on a range of issues which include improving London’s hospital infrastructure, and I will let the Assembly know when I receive a response to that letter.

Krupesh Hirani: Thank you.

The Fire Risk Posed by E-Scooters and E-Bikes

Hina Bokhari: How will you keep Londoners safe from the increase of fires related to e-scooters and e-bikes?

Sadiq Khan: The use of e‑scooters and e‑bikes is continuing to increase across London. When these are purpose‑built e‑bikes or regular scooters built to high standards, they are for Londoners a green, cheap and convenient way of getting around the city. However, there are some serious safety concerns around modified e‑bikes and privately owned e‑scooters, and it is important that Londoners understand which vehicles are safe and which might not be.
As e‑bikes and e‑scooters have become more common, the LFB has seen an increase in the number of fires that they are attending involving lithium‑ion batteries from these types of vehicles. As the Brigade has learnt more about the specific risks involved with modified e‑bikes and privately owned e‑scooters, they have provided updated safety advice to Londoners so they can keep themselves safe.
Privately purchased e‑scooters are illegal for use in public, and in the run‑up to Christmas last year my Walking and Cycling Commissioner wrote a joint letter with the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to retailers to remind them of this. There is also huge variation in the quality of products that people are buying and using. The Government urgently needs to introduce a regulatory framework for private e‑scooters to address this as the current situation poses a risk to people across the country, including in London. Conversion kits, which allow people to convert a normal bike to an e‑bike, are the cause of many of the fires attended by the Brigade, including e‑bikes. They have usually been bought from online marketplaces and may not meet the correct safety standards. Without legislation to provide clear national standards and accountability for those selling poor‑quality products that are used on the road, reducing these types of fires will remain a challenge.
In London, we have already taken steps to ensure that e‑bikes and e‑scooters on our streets are safe. The vehicles used legally on our roads in Transport for London’s (TfL) trial of e‑scooters are subject to rigorous safety measures and build specification. We have taken a similar approach with the e‑bikes now available through the expansion of the Santander cycle schemes, with 500 new e‑bikes having been made available for hire last week. The Government should support our efforts through legislating to address issues of poor‑quality products and better enforcement powers, including allowing enforcement against e‑scooters as an issue of antisocial behaviour (ASB). We will continue to take a sensible approach to providing Londoners with transport options that are affordable, reduce congestion on our roads, improve air quality and are safe.

Hina Bokhari: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. Since I raised this issue in February[2022], fires, as you say, have continued, linked to e‑bikes and e‑scooters, and in August London Bridge station was actually closed due to a fire that was started by an electric rickshaw, like a pedicab, that was left charging in the arches of Union Street. Before the change of PrimeMinister, the Government intended to regulate pedicabs in the new Transport Bill. Do you agree that pedicabs in London need to be regulated and how will you ensure this?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, it is good news from the Government but it is not the first time the Government has said that they will be supporting outlawing pedicabs. Assembly MemberPidgeon will remember ‑ a longer memory than many of us who are new ‑ that for some time they have been promising, either by Private Members’ Bill or this time as an amendment to a clause. They are committed to doing this and I am sure they will. I have seen no evidence from the Government that there is going to be a U‑turn on this. You are right, those pedicabs are not only dangerous in relation to road safety but I think 12 of the electric ones were in the fire you refer to in Southwark.

Hina Bokhari: I want to know more about what you can do, because the LFB social media channels are simply not enough when we must do all we can to prevent a death that could result from charging an e‑bike or e‑scooter. Will you now commit your dedicated funding to a Londonwide campaign and apply pressure on the Government to join you and other Mayors in a major national campaign for improved public awareness?

Sadiq Khan: All the Mayors across the country who have trials in their areas are working with the Department for Transport (DfT) in relation to the future of e‑scooters. Some of that is around public education and public awareness. As this Christmas approaches, [Dr] WillNorman [London’s Walking and Cycling Commissioner], with the MPS, will again be writing to retailers reminding them of their responsibilities. The big issue is the online sales, which we have no control over. You will be aware online sales are used to buy dangerous knives and indeed dangerous e‑scooters and conversion kits. We are doing what we can with Trading Standards, councils and others to raise awareness and we will carry on doing so.

Hina Bokhari: My last set of questions is on safety information resulting in an update to the LFB website, which I was really pleased to see. There is still no explicit mention of the dangers that you were talking about; the ‘do it yourself’ (DIY) battery kits that are being bought online and assembled at home for e‑bikes. Likewise, there is no mention of the advancing technology that you also mentioned, which has led to some safe e‑bikes. Now, as you say, as we approach Christmas, we do need to be warning Londoners. Using your communication channels is a great way of warning people of the dangers of these cheap, DIY batteries that are being made at home and to promote reputable manufacturers of e‑bikes.

Sadiq Khan: Sure. I am not sure what the question is.

Hina Bokhari: The question is: will you use your channels to promote manufacturers that are making safe and reputable e‑bikes, and stop the sale of DIY batteries?

Sadiq Khan: We will not be using my channels to promote certain manufacturers. We do not advertise certain manufacturers or companies.

Hina Bokhari: What about making sure that you are using your communication channels to talk about the dangers of cheap DIY batteries?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, and I am sure the LFB understand the importance of doing so. I will carry on working with the LFB to make sure they can amplify the dangers, particularly at Christmastime. Parents with the best of intentions may want to buy a gift for their child, not realising‑‑

Hina Bokhari: Forgive me, Mr Mayor, but we already have the LFB doing quite a lot on this, it is just not getting that message across. We do need your support to do this as well.

Sadiq Khan: We will carry on supporting the LFB in any way we can. I look forward to seeing leaflets from your party on this issue as well. They tend to be quite keen on leafleting, maybe they will do us some of these as well.

Hina Bokhari: Happy to work together on this.

Oversight of the Metropolitan Police

Susan Hall: Has your oversight of the Metropolitan Police been effective?

Sadiq Khan: My role as the elected Police and Crime Commissioner for London is to support the MPS in bearing down on crime but also to hold them to account to deliver the level of services Londoners deserve. That is the law. Unlike others, I recognise that some elements of that service have not been good enough and that wide‑ranging reforms are urgently needed for the MPS to regain the trust and confidence of Londoners, deliver for victims and protect the public.
Many of the issues raised by HMICFRS in its recent PEEL report are not new to me. That is why, among other things, I have put in place my Action Plan to improve trust and confidence, appointed London’s first Victims’ Commissioner to act as an advocate and champion for victims’ rights, and set up the London Child Protection Policing Improvement Oversight Group. All these actions have been part of my robust oversight of the MPS. I also called for HMICFRS to review the MPS following the failings in the StephenPort [convicted murderer] investigation. Following concerns raised by the London Victims’ Commissioner, the Deputy Mayor [for Policing and Crime] ensured that the MPS reviewed its Witness Care Units. The review will examine the quality of communications to victims, internal processes, roles and responsibilities, culture, and workload.
The recent HMICFRS PEEL report and the decision to put the MPS into the Engage phase has served to underline my longstanding concerns, identifying areas that my Deputy Mayor and I have already raised with the MPS. It will help us to push the MPS to deliver the reform required. The MPS is now engaging with the HMICFRS Police Performance Oversight Group, designed to help the MPS make the improvements needed. Later today, the Commissioner and I will be meeting with HMICFRS and others as part of this process.
I am under no illusion about the challenges ahead, but I welcome the opportunity to work with SirMark[Rowley QPM, Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis] to drive forward the necessary cultural change. I remain committed to ensuring Londoners receive the very best service from the MPS and I will continue to be robust in my oversight to ensure this happens. As Mayor, I will not rest until we have delivered the police reforms and step change in policing culture that our city deserves.

Susan Hall: Thank you, MrMayor. You are, indeed, the Police and Crime Commissioner in London and have been for six years. You are saying that you understood all the things that the PEEL report showed up, so the question is obvious. Why on earth did you not do something about it a lot earlier, about all these issues that have been raised, if you knew all about them?

Sadiq Khan: Well, I have given some examples in my main answer, some of the things that the Deputy Mayor [for Policing and Crime] and I have been doing. I will give you another couple of examples of stuff we have been doing subsequently, once SirTom[Winsor, former Chief Inspector of Constabulary] leaves, recognised by HMICFRS. The MPScontact centre‑‑‑

Susan Hall: Sorry, whatdid you say? I did not hear that. “Once SirTom”‑‑ what did you just say? Can you clarify?

Sadiq Khan: I can, indeed.

Susan Hall: Thank you.

Sadiq Khan: Once SirTom had left HMICFRS, HMICFRS has agreed with what we have said.

Susan Hall: Right, thank you.

Sadiq Khan: The MPS contact centre: we invested £5million in our last budget to address the issues subsequently recognised by HMICFRS in answering calls. We sought to address issues in relation to victims’ services before the latest PEEL report and there are other examples. Our Action Plan being another one that we have sought to address. Look, it may feel nice being vindicated, but it is not nice with the police being in special measures. The good news is we are working with HMICFRS, we now have a new [HM] Chief Inspector [of Constabulary], we are working with the College of Policing, and we are working with the National Police Chiefs’ Council. With a new Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] and a new team around him, I am sure we can address those issues identified recently by HMICFRS.

Susan Hall: You have been in charge for six years; it is not like it is five minutes. You have been in charge for six years and things have slowly got worse and worse, as has been shown up in the PEEL report. Let us face it; you have a £19billion budget. I would have thought with an extensive budget such as you have, when you started to see things going wrong and your Deputy Mayor [for Policing and Crime] said she had seen things going wrong before, surely it is the job of the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC)‑‑

Onkar Sahota: AssemblyMemberHall, you are well out of time now.

Susan Hall: What a shame. I would have loved to have heard the Mayor try to get out of that, but anyway,thank you.

Onkar Sahota: Well, we have no idea what the Mayor may have said or not said, but you are out of time.

Susan Hall: We never do, Chair. We never do.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, you can guess. You can guess.

New Met Commissioner

Tony Devenish: The new Met Police Commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley commenced work on 12th September. What progress have you made in the last month in improving your personal relationships with the Met for the benefit of Londoners after 6 years as London’s Police & Crime Commissioner?

Sadiq Khan: I was really pleased to welcome SirMarkRowley [QPM] and DameLynneOwens [DCB CBE QPM] as the new Commissioner and interim Deputy Commissioner of the MPS last month. Both SirMark and DameLynne come with a wealth of knowledge and expertise. Each of them has over three decades of history in law enforcement services. Both are recognised for their leadership in taking serious policing issues and indeed tackling them. They both return after periods away from the MPS, four years in SirMark’s case, ten years for DameLynne, bringing a fresh perspective and the added experience they have accumulated outside of the MPS.
They both rejoined the MPS just a few days after the death of Her Late Majesty QueenElizabeth[II], and oversaw a successful, large‑scale operation, which enabled millions of people to pay their respects safely. I want to take this opportunity to thank all the officers from the MPS and across the country ‑ and, indeed, including other parts of the world ‑ who worked for the duration of the mourning period to ensure everyone visiting our capital could do so safely.
SirMark and I work closely together already. There is a lot of work to do in order to reform the MPS and deliver a service that all Londoners and the hardworking officers and staff of the MPS can be proud of. A series of appalling scandals and the HMICFRS police effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy (PEEL) inspection put the MPS into the Engage process. These have not only exposed deep cultural problems within the MPS but have also contributed to a crisis of confidence in London’s police service under the former Commissioner’s watch.
I have been speaking publicly about my concerns about the culture and standards in the MPS for some time and I am pleased that we now have a new Commissioner who can get to work on tackling these issues. In my regular bilateral meetings with the Commissioner, I am briefed on the actions being taken to radically reform the MPS. My Deputy Mayor [for Policing and Crime] and I continue to hold the MPS to account to ensure it delivers the services that all Londoners deserve. From the outset, I have confidence that SirMark understands the scale of change that is needed in the MPS to rebuild trust with Londoners, and this was one of the key reasons I felt he was the best person for this challenging job. SirMark agrees we need to get the basics of policing right and build on the significant success we have made in driving down the violence and crime in our city.

Tony Devenish: Thank you, MrMayor. I wanted to raise just one issue today to give a specific example of how this relationship may work, if I can. You probably saw the protest this week by Just Stop Oil. The reality is Londoners are facing ambulances being blocked in the road, fire engines being blocked in the road and people trying to get to hospitals with their sick kids. How are you going to work with SirMark to stop these people stopping London working?

Sadiq Khan: Look, the key thing I explained to those protesters, in a non‑patronising way, is we fully accept that protest is the cornerstone of our democracy but it has to be peaceful, lawful and safe. Also, what you cannot be doing is blocking key arteries that the blue light services need. You will have seen the swift action over the weekend from the police in relation to our bridges, and TfL and the police are working closely together in relation to what work they can do to avoid key arteries being blocked by protesters.
I make this point generally to the protesters. I do not think they are encouraging people to join their cause by some of the examples you refer to. Question: if a fire engine is delayed getting to a fire and that leads to loss of life, how does that benefit the Just Stop Oil campaign? Question: if a patient in an ambulance cannot reach a hospital in time and it leads to real consequences to that patient, how do you think that is going to affect the issue? I just think they need to understand the consequences of some of our key arteries being blocked the way they have been.

Tony Devenish: I hope you will make that point to SirMark because he was quite reluctant yesterday on this. It is the one subject I was not very happy about with his answer, but I will leave it there because of time. Thank you, Chair.

Immediate Support during the Energy Crisis

Leonie Cooper: Whilst the Energy Price Guarantee is welcome, Londoners are still left with energy costs at twice what they were this time last year - plus help is only promised for a short period of time. What more can be done to help Londoners cope in the short term with the costs of the energy crisis?

Sadiq Khan: Londoners face the possibility of not being able to either heat their homes or put food on the table this winter. The massive and unprecedented scale of this crisis can only be addressed through Government intervention. The Government finally answered calls to do something, but the energy guarantee still means that bills will be double last winter’s levels. What is even worse is that this will be paid for by the public through increased national borrowing instead of through a windfall tax on the massive profits of energy companies.
I am calling for the introduction of a lifeline tariff to ensure that the most vulnerable people receive a certain amount of free energy every day. The Government has failed to make the UK resilient to energy price shocks. Looking ahead to next year and beyond, it should do this through a mass programme of insulation and renewable energy, rather than the expansion of fossil fuels and fracking.
I will keep doing everything in my power and within my limited resources to support Londoners now and through winter. My £43million Warmer Homes programme provides grants of up to £25,000 to low‑income households to make their homes warmer, greener and cheaper to run. I have recently launched a new advice service, Energy Advice London, in partnership with the Energy Saving Trust, operating online and over the phone to anyone in London struggling with their energy bills. Londoners will be able to get advice on saving energy, keeping warm at home, installing renewable energy systems and financial support to make their homes more energy efficient. The most vulnerable households can continue to receive in‑home energy advice and support with energy debt from my Warmer Homes Advice Service, which has already helped over 15,500 London households. Over 300 organisations across London are referral partners.
My Cost of Living Hub brings together advice and information on benefits, grants and discounts when Londoners face financial difficulty. They can access it via the London.gov.uk website. I am also investing another £4million in the provision of financial welfare advice, helping Londoners who are struggling financially to increase their incomes and avoid debt.

Léonie Cooper: Thank you very much, MrMayor. I know that you have been doing a lot in this space. We have had the Retrofit Accelerator. Also, we are now the only people in the country who are still making community energy something that is being funded, which is disappointing because it has been worked out that if you put £1 into community energy, it delivers £60 of benefit.
The Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) Select Committee has identified that a social tariff and a far‑reaching programme of home insulation is the enduring way for all of us to respond and to have a proper solution to this energy crisis. Is there any information that we are getting here in City Hall? I know the Government has possibly been slightly distracted by some turbulence, as they called it, and a few other things. Is there anything that is actually concrete that is coming out from the Government as well as from the
Select Committee that could give us some hope?

Sadiq Khan: No. I am really worried. If they removed the Green Levy ‑ it is worth reminding that the Green Levy helps to pay for programmes such as the Energy Company Obligation ‑ how are we going to fund some of this stuff that is needed? The reason why it just does not make sense the Government not doing more on insulation or retrofitting is that it addresses the issue that people worry about, which is paying their bills, a really important issue. It keeps them warm, warmer than they otherwise would be with draughts and so forth. Also, it reduces carbon emissions, creating great jobs, future‑proof jobs. It just beggars belief the short‑sightedness in relation to allowing fossil fuel companies to keep their massive profits and also talking about introducing fracking as a way to address these issues, neither of which are going to tackle climate change or help families this winter, let alone next winter.

Léonie Cooper: No. Thank you very much, MrMayor. That is just a problem that we are having to deal with the Government’s position on this.